And we need a plan to do some changes on APISIX IMO, anyone would like to take this issue?
Zhiyuan Ju <juzhiy...@apache.org>于2021年3月18日 周四下午1:06写道： > Yep > > Chao Zhang <zchao1...@gmail.com>于2021年3月18日 周四下午1:04写道： > >> I think the point that put forward by Ju is same with what I proposed :) >> >> Chao Zhang >> https://github.com/tokers >> >> On March 18, 2021 at 11:55:14 AM, Ming Wen (wenm...@apache.org) wrote: >> >> chao zhang's idea is good for me. >> what do you think? >> >> Thanks, >> Ming Wen, Apache APISIX PMC Chair >> Twitter: _WenMing >> >> >> Zhiyuan Ju <juzhiy...@apache.org> 于2021年3月18日周四 上午11:49写道： >> >> > Any conclusion and plan here? >> > >> > There has 1 related PR[1]. >> > >> > [1] https://github.com/apache/apisix-dashboard/pull/1603 >> > >> > Best Regards! >> > @ Zhiyuan Ju <https://github.com/juzhiyuan> >> > >> > >> > Zhiyuan Ju <juzhiy...@apache.org> 于2021年3月17日周三 下午11:22写道： >> > >> > > yep, after going through Tyk & Kong, I would agree to use >> `preserve_host` >> > > to replace the current 3 opinions. >> > > >> > > Best Regards! >> > > @ Zhiyuan Ju <https://github.com/juzhiyuan> >> > > >> > > >> > > Ming Wen <wenm...@apache.org> 于2021年3月17日周三 下午5:44写道： >> > > >> > >> nice！ >> > >> +1 >> > >> >> > >> Chao Zhang <zchao1...@gmail.com>于2021年3月17日 周三下午3:12写道： >> > >> >> > >> > Why not just use one option, "Preserve Client Host”, by default >> it’s >> > >> > closed, which means the Host header will be rewrite to the Upstream >> > >> host; >> > >> > When it’s opened, the client host will inherited >> > >> > when proxying to upstream. >> > >> > >> > >> > Chao Zhang >> > >> > https://github.com/tokers >> > >> > >> > >> > On March 17, 2021 at 2:49:50 PM, Ming Wen (wenm...@apache.org) >> wrote: >> > >> > >> > >> > I think there should be only two options: preserve and use upstream >> > >> host, >> > >> > the default is the latter >> > >> > >> > >> > JunXu Chen <chenju...@apache.org>于2021年3月17日 周三下午1:46写道： >> > >> > >> > >> > > Hi, Community, >> > >> > > >> > >> > > Currently we use `pass_host` to mark how to process the upstream >> > >> > request’s >> > >> > > Host header. >> > >> > > >> > >> > > It can be one of [`pass`, `node`, `rewrite`], the default option >> is >> > >> > `pass`. >> > >> > > pass: Pass the client's host transparently to the upstream; >> > >> > > node: Use the host configured in the node of upstream; >> > >> > > rewrite: Use the value of the configuration upstream_host. >> > >> > > >> > >> > > Referring to nginx(proxy_pass), tyk and kong, we found that their >> > >> default >> > >> > > behavior is not to preserve the client's request Host, but to set >> > the >> > >> > > upstream request’s Host header to the hostname specified in the >> > >> > > upstream(service) by default. >> > >> > > >> > >> > > issues: >> > >> > > >> > >> > > 1. `pass_host` is not easy to understand, I think we could use >> > >> > > `preserve_host` or `preserve_host_header` instead. >> > >> > > >> > >> > > 2. We should also be the same behavior as nginx, tyk and kong, >> not >> > >> > preserve >> > >> > > the client's request Host by default if the hostname has been >> > >> specified >> > >> > in >> > >> > > the upstream. >> > >> > > >> > >> > > What is your opinion? Thanks! >> > >> > > >> > >> > -- >> > >> > Thanks, >> > >> > Ming Wen, Apache APISIX PMC Chair >> > >> > Twitter: _WenMing >> > >> > >> > >> -- >> > >> Thanks, >> > >> Ming Wen, Apache APISIX PMC Chair >> > >> Twitter: _WenMing >> > >> >> > > >> > >> > -- > 来自 琚致远 > -- 来自 琚致远
